But right now the Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, with attendant ships, is sheltering in British waters, riding out a North Sea storm en route to Syria; to show their Flag & support of their one-time client Syria.The Mediterranean cruise had been planned for months before the Syrian mess started. It's mostly unrelated.
The resolution appears toothless, and directed at preempting a more decisive resolution.
Destroyer keeps watch on Russian carrier (Great Britain)Its just a bluf on the russian side,what can they do?
The US has also many ships there so np,i think Assad asked them to show some muscle but wont help.
If there comes a war it will be a big one,lets hope not.
Silly, to put it mildly. This is nothing like the 1905 situation with Japan. Flight of Russian bombers are basic training for the crews of the planes. You don't seriously expect a country to maintain a bomber fleet without training? The same applies to submarines, and even to the Kuznetsov cruise. The Kuznetsov has been making long range voyages almost every year for a little while now. This one is no different. Escorting them, as they will most certainly be, will not deter future trips of the sort, nor will it send any meaningful political message to Russian leadership.But right now the Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, with attendant ships, is sheltering in British waters, riding out a North Sea storm en route to Syria; to show their Flag & support of their one-time client Syria.
Shades of Russian problems en route to Japan in 1905?
Nevertheless, the Putin regime is on an aggressive course w/regard to the west & NATO. Flight incursions with the older Bear bombers are well up, again more testing of NATO tolerances. Same with Russian submarine activity. It is not in NATO's interest to pretend these thing are not happening, or bury one's head in the sand. If the Russian carrier group proceeds into the Med., it should be shadowed or harassed constantly by US 6th Fleet; but more importantly, by Turkey & other NATO partners; Greece, and by France, with its own very serious Med. interests. If Putin is not made to understand NATO takes its duties in its own Home areas with utmost serious-ness, Russians are just historically emboldened to undertake further active military measures.
Have the Kuznetsov, and the Admiral Chabanenko moved on from sheltering off 30nm off the Scottish coast or are they still there? If Tartus is indeed the intended destination what do you think Russia has to gain by those ships being there, especially as it appears that situation within Syria seems to be deteriorating each day? Just to throw something else into the mix, is this visit to Tartsus possibly a message to Israel and the US about their ramping up the talk of hostilities with Iran?To summarize, a month ago the Smetliviy Patrol Ship visited Tartus but it's already gone, now Kuznetsov and Chabanenko are en route there. Those are the three ships that the media is talking about.
.
Well Russia has been making regular visits to Tartus for the last few years. In this case I suspect that the task-force may be used to deter the rebels from trying to do anything to the Russian facilities, and if all else fails, possibly evacuate the base. Russia is certainly willing to go further to protect Syria, then Libya, as Syria is a fairly loyal Russian client-state. That having been said, the VMF ships going there currently are a rather mediocre show of force, at best. For example the Kuznetsov is only carrying 8 Su-33s on board.Have the Kuznetsov, and the Admiral Chabanenko moved on from sheltering off 30nm off the Scottish coast or are they still there? If Tartus is indeed the intended destination what do you think Russia has to gain by those ships being there, especially as it appears that situation within Syria seems to be deteriorating each day? Just to throw something else into the mix, is this visit to Tartsus possibly a message to Israel and the US about their ramping up the talk of hostilities with Iran?
Reminds me of when the Monterey entered the Black Sea after the Georgia episode. Quite exposed in that area from possible air attack yet to do so the Russians risked starting a major conflict. These thinkers are largely symbolic.Well Russia has been making regular visits to Tartus for the last few years. In this case I suspect that the task-force may be used to deter the rebels from trying to do anything to the Russian facilities, and if all else fails, possibly evacuate the base. Russia is certainly willing to go further to protect Syria, then Libya, as Syria is a fairly loyal Russian client-state. That having been said, the VMF ships going there currently are a rather mediocre show of force, at best. For example the Kuznetsov is only carrying 8 Su-33s on board.
clarity of thought helps everyone participate.They go in to houses take the men out and "arrest" them or shoot protesters on the streets thats it.
About my grammar,im not english this is the best i know so relax.
Is the topic about grammar?
Well I am glad it was you that brought up the matter of Turkey (and just before Christmas )actually I think the issue is more about the west not wanting to amp up the turks.
they regard themselves as the elder statesman of that region by historical right and have not been shy about mobilising their own forces on the syrian border to send a message, they've done this at least 3 times in the last 5 years.
there's some idealogical jockeying going on between the two historical giants, Egypt and Turkey and I think everyone is nervous about upsetting that apple cart.
the arab league has long been encouraged to exercise a more robust role between members, but they've consistently taken the "non interventionist" approach as its been culturally comfortable as well as strategically convenient, they're now at the point where they can't continue to sit back and be seen as endorsing the behaviour because they then give license to protestors in their own countries arguing that they're ineffectual.
so, yes, in sme ways its about pre-empting "the west", but I think the bigger game is about the local politics
the turks however are the only local game in town that actually frightens the syrians because they have actual evidence of turkish impatience in the past. the kurds have provided the turks with hot pursuit excuses regularly in the past, so the syrians know full well that the turks are not afraid to cross over
Putin seems have gone back to the old ‘zero-sum-game’ politics of the Cold War, i.e. if it is bad for the USA/NATO it is good for Russia/USSR. Russia has become increasingly uncooperative, even contrary, on most issues in the last year. The question is whether this was the way he saw things all along, but hid it when he was president, or if it is just rhetorical attempts to create a us-vs.-them politic because of his rising unpopularity at home when he is running to get elected president again.Interesting that virtually every press report on this website contains anti western sentiment and increasingly so; RT is a state run media organisation. I agree that this a political and not military issue, but it does amaze me why there is so much intense antagonism and rhetoric flying around at the moment.
Yes Syria has the S-300, though in limited numbers. As for your internet rumors...On the subject of the dreaded S-300 system whether or not they are in Syrian (or indeed Iranian) hands;
Has this system actually been tested in a combat situation? The internet is choked at the moment with the alledged virtues of Russian missile systems and their abilities to take down stealth aircraft, evade AMD and sink US carriers.
There is a massive distance between theory and practise particular in matters of war.
I recall reading a while ago where Israeli planes flew into Syrian air space deliberately to test the response of their Russian made missile defences. The outcome was that they were nothing to be feared. Was this S300?Syria has the S-300? Since when?
No. This was the Pantsyr-S1 (SA-22). A point-ADS intended to support S-300 class systems. Iirc 50 of them were delivered to Syria. Given their Buk-M2E acquisitions, I suspect the two will be used in tandem.I recall reading a while ago where Israeli planes flew into Syrian air space deliberately to test the response of their Russian made missile defences. The outcome was that they were nothing to be feared. Was this S300?
There has been a lot of talk on the subject recently of which the linked article is typical.Syria has the S-300? Since when?
Huh? I know Syria's been on a shopping spree for Russian GBAD lately, but it wouldn't be the Russian military installing them. They would be delivered by the manufacturer. There may be a number of military advisers in Syria, but overall I don't have much confidence in this article. I'd like some serious evidence that Syria has received any S-300s. Iirc they upgraded some of their S-125s to the Pechora-2M level, they got ~50 Pantsyrs, and an unknown number of Buk-M2Es, quite possible some radar systems, EW, and C4I gear for their new toys, but S-300 sales seem quite unlikely.Al Quds asserted that the Russian
military has been installing advanced radar systems around all key Syrian
military and industrial sites to prevent air strikes.